On Thu, 19 Jul 2007 09:02:03 +0100 (IST) Dave Airlie <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > > arm: > > > > drivers/char/drm/drm_lock.c: In function `drm_lock_take': > > drivers/char/drm/drm_lock.c:221: error: implicit declaration of function > > `cmpxchg' > > > > You might be able to use atomic_cmpxchg, which _is_ present > > on all architectures. Or use a spinlock. > > > > What's that code doing anyway? driver-private locking primitives? > > When did arm suddenly start wanting DRM? It's selectable in config. allmodconfig broke. > they need to grow a userpsace > cmpxchg as davem mentioned to go along with this, changing the drm now > isn't possible due to backwards compat.. For reference purposes, that position is not acceptable. We _never_ accept the "oh I can't change my proposed kernel interface because I already have userspace relying on it" argument. Hopefully that won't be an issue here. I guess DRM now needs a `depends on !ARM'. - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
